Post Twenty Three

On Universal Orlando's Halloween Horror Nights

 

E.A. Poe's "Nevermore" Haunted House: My Favorite

My wife, son, and his cousin just returned from an amazing Universal Orlando 4-day vacation.  The highlight of the trip for me and the kids was the event known as Halloween Horror Nights which is pretty much regarded by horror fans as the sine qua non of Halloween experiences in the nation.  As a rabid horror fan I am somewhat ashamed to admit that I have lived in Florida for over a decade, and have never attended.  Needless to say, I was looking forward to October 14th with great anticipation, and my only worry was whether or not this mental build-up would lead to a huge let-down.  I should not have worried; HHN's was all that and more. 

For those of you completely unfamiliar with HHN here is a quick guide:

A.  HHN is a special event held every fall at Universal Studios Orlando (not Islands of Adventure; now known as the Harry Potter Park). 

B.  HHN is not included in your daily park ticket.  At 5:00pm, Universal Studios closes it's doors and kicks everyone out.  I have read that some people try to hide in the park, but I have never heard of it being done successfully.  Besides, the penalty would probably include being banned permanently from the park which is not worth the risk. 

C.  Cost:  Not cheap.  I paid over $100 a ticket because I opted for the Express Pass.  In my opinion, you are simply wasting your time if you do not choose this feature.  The average wait time on a Friday or Saturday night for each haunted house is over two hours.  With the Express Pass you will easily see all of the houses in 4-5 hours.  Without one, you will be lucky to see four houses; not to mention the sheer frustration of seeing people with these passes walk on by you hour after hour. 

D.  Start early.  HHN open the doors at 6:30pm.  Eat beforehand, and get into the park.  Head straight for the houses.  It matters not if the sun is still shining because the houses are totally light controlled.  Later, when it gets dark, you can hit the Scare Zones which are simply not worth experiencing in the daylight as they are all outside.  At night, they can be truly creepy.  In the day, they are annoying. 

E.  Under no circumstances would I bring small children to this event.  The minimum age I would recommend is 13-14, and even then you should make sure your young adult is not scared easily.  The houses are intense, adult-themed experiences, and would be traumatic to a young child (I don't think they let children into the houses in any event).

The Houses

Nevermore (5/5)

Edgar Allan Poe is my favorite horror author, and I was excited to hear that HHN would have a Poe-themed house.  It could have fallen flat on it's face, though, as Poe is not what I would call contemporary, and if handled incorrectly by a bunch of Rob Zombie wannabees this house could have been an absolute disaster.  Fortunately, this was not the case.  All of Poe's major works are represented, and even the smell of this house was pure Gothic horror.  Awesome. 

Nightingales: Blood Prey (5/5)

This house was a big surprise as I expected a hospital theme.  Instead, you descend into a World War One trench and are attacked by ravenous beings from beyond.  The soldiers also take shots at you.  It was truly frightening.  A twentys-somthing woman behind me actually hit me in the back several times (not hard, thankfully) while screaming her head off.  The only reason I rate this a little lower than Nevermore is the theme (IMO, Poe can't be beat).  Other than that caveat these two houses were the highlights of the night.

Saws N' Steam: Into the Machine (4/5)

The theme of this strange house was truly creepy.  A mad scientist comes up with the idea to create a pollution free, steam-powered Utopian metropolis.  The only problem is the steam power will come from unwilling human victims.  In terms of graphic violence this house had no equal.  Each room was littered with scenes that would make a serial killer queasy.  Just a step below the first two in horror, and only just.

The In Between  (3.5/5)

This house will probably be the favorite of non-horror fans simply because of it's gimmick.  Yes, this house is presented in 3D, and if you love 3D, then this house would be near the top for you.  For me, it was cool, but the horror just was not there.  Not scary in the slightest, but the effect, I will admit, was pulled off successfully. 

The Thing (3.5/5)

High hopes for this house based on the movie that was just released (Carpenter's is better, by the way).  Overall, this house did what it was supposed to, but not much else.  By far the loudest house in the park as you almost feel like you are in a heavy metal concert.  It was a solid house, but nothing special.

Winter's Night (3/5)

Your traditional, Victorian-themed haunted cemetery comes to life.  Pretty cool for such a well-worn theme.  It was like Poe's "Nevermore", but with less scares.  A couple of jumpy moments take it above simply average.  Enjoyable, and the antithesis in theme from the "The Thing".  Overall, slightly above average.

H.R. Bloodengutz Presents: Holidays of Horror (3/5)

Traditionally, horror movies are divided into two general categories: the first takes itself very seriously (think "The Exorcist") and the second doesn't (think "Chucky).  This house ends up on the far end of the second kind.  Campy horror humor can be funny if you have an open mind, and a strong stomach.  My favorite moment: seeing a Thanksgiving turkey with all the trimmings; instead of turkey, though, you have an actual human being!  The Indians getting back at the white man, I suppose.

The Forsaken (2.5/5)

Silly house.  I really didn't like Carpenter's "The Fog" theme to begin with (the movie is great, but as an indoor haunted house?), and all of the characters looked the same.  It was as if the team doing HHN ran out of ideas, and came up with this house.  I actually saw a woman come out of this house in tears.  I did, too, but for different reasons (just kidding). 

Conclusion

Well, 7/8 would grade out as an "A", and that's what I would give HHN.  It was an amazing experience in every way, and I will be back next year (draggin' the wife kickin n' screamin', but she loves me).  Hope to see you there!

  

Post Twenty Two

On Restrepo

Looks like fun, doesn't it?  Restrepo is a docudrama about the Afghanistan "kinetic conflict" (per the current administration).  The film follows a small group of soldiers over the course of their entire fifteen month tour of duty in 2007-08.  At various points, the action is interspersed with present-day interviews of the protagonists reflecting on their experiences.  I found the film riveting and totally unbiased.  The director had no political agenda.  This fact allows the viewer to draw their own conclusions based on the material presented.

Restrepo, by the way, is the name of an outpost in the unit's area of operations; the Korengal Valley in eastern Afghanistan.  It is also the name of the unit's first KIA (Killed in Action; PFC. Juan Restrepo).  By all accounts, the Korengal is a very nasty place.  Were it not for gravity and an atmosphere I would be hard pressed to distinguish it from the surface of the moon.  This valley is home to some rather unfriendly locals, and a boatload of Taliban insurgents.  The soldier's mission is to win the hearts and minds of the locals while at the same time extending their zone of control deeper into Taliban-held territory.

Most of the action takes place at outpost Restrepo which is only a few hundred meters from the unit's main base.  It might as well have been in Kansas, though, as the Taliban frequently launches attacks and harassment fire from the surrounding mountains.  You really get a feel for how out in the open the unit has been placed, and how incredibly stressful this situation places on the individual soldiers.  The unit's commanding officer is Captain Kearney who has big dreams of building bridges with the locals and taking it to the Taliban. 

This dream leads us to the film's big finale where the unit is deployed in an aggressive patrol deep into Taliban territory.  The unit is attacked immediately, and the unit suffers more losses.  While we are told the Taliban suffer grievous losses we never actually see any bodies.  I guess we take it on their word that all the aircraft bombs and drones actually hit their targets. 

The bridge-building with the local elders is a joke.  Capt. Kearney is truly out of this depth, and while he means well the locals simply want us to leave.  It's a very sad situation.  You feel for the soldiers, but one cannot help but come to the conclusion that this war is simply another Vietnam.  And it is likely to end the same way.

Restrepo is well worth seeing.  I recommend it highly as a good way to get the real story about the war in Afghanistan with all the political fluff removed.

4/5 Stars. 

Post Twenty One

On The Last Exorcism

Sorry I have been away for so long, but life must intrude on one's leisure activities.  I just completed a major revision of my home theater, and I feel motivated to write reviews of films that would fall in"the road less traveled" realm of the spectrum.  To be clear, you will never see me review any of the big blockbusters or flavors of the day.  There are plenty of other, better blogs for that.  However, I hope I can shed some light on some movies you would never consider; either for their content, reputation, or lack of publicity. 

Last night I saw The Last Exorcism.  For the record, I am a born, raised, and active Roman Catholic.  The subject of exorcism has always been fascinating to me, not only because of my upbringing, but that the concept of a lone, frail human battling a demon from Hell in a spiritual battle of wills appeals to my worldview of good vs. evil.  And light does not always triumph; meaning, good may win the war, but individual battles will indeed be lost.

All exorcist movies must be compared to the granddaddy of them all, The Exorcist (1973; directed by William Friedkin), which was based on a novel of the same name.  I have to admit this movie is downright scary, and additional viewings do not lessen it's impact.  Yes, some of the special effects are primitive by today's standards, but the tone and mood of this film is, for lack of a better description, evil and oppressive.  You endure The Exorcist as much as view it.  I consider it the greatest horror movie ever made. 

Having said that, The Last Exorcism has a great deal to live up to.  Viewers of this film are more likely than not to have seen similar movies of it's kind, and the result could easily be disastrous.  Indeed, we have only to look at The Exorcist II, one of the worst horror movies ever made, for proof.  It's very hard to stand on the same ground of something that has come before and been so successful, and such efforts rarely succeed.  The last big exorcist horror movie was The Exorcism of Emily Rose.  It was just "ok"; nothing really new here.  The movie was saved by the performance of Tom Wilkinson; a character-actor who gave a stellar performance of the film's protagonist priest, Father Moore.

So, what exactly is The Last Exorcism?  The film was billed as The Blair Witch Project meets The Exorcist.  In some ways this is true, but truthfully it's far more Blair Witch than Exorcist.  The Last Exorcism is a "mockumentary" in the same vein as Blair Witch.  This choice was polarizing as you either like that kind of gimmick or you don't.  Some good news; most of the "shaky camera" herky-jerky movement shouldn't cause too much self-induced nausea as it's effect is far less pronounced than in Blair Witch. 

Plot:

Baton Rouge child-prodigy Pentecostal preacher Cotton Marcus becomes disillusioned with his career choice.  In short, he is tired of being a charlatan.  The preacher hires a film crew to document his last exorcism in order to expose the fraud which he and his kind perpetrate on the ignorant and superstitious (props for actually mentioning The Exorcist).  Marcus takes the crew to a rural Louisianian farm where the owner claims cattle and animals are being killed by his possessed daughter.  Marcus performs an "exorcism" using some very poor special effects, and pronounces the girl free from demon influence while gladly taking the farmer's money.  Unfortunately for Marcus and crew the demon inside the girl has other ideas.

Pros:

As someone who is a practicing Catholic I was immediately put off by Preacher Marcus.  He insulted my faith and beliefs on a very personal level.  Having said that, though, the film does allow Marcus to find his way back at the end.  The story is not overly complicated, and very easy to follow.  You can feel empathy for this family that has experienced a great deal of tragedy, and the acting is overall very good for this genre.  There are some very scary moments in this film, and you will get goosebumps.  Creep factor is above average. 

Cons:

"Why not go to the police?"  "Why are they not involved?"  You will be yelling these common horror-film cliches at the screen more than once.   To be fair, it's a horror movie, and common sense takes a backseat to entertainment.  Still... 

The ending is not very good or well done, and does not fit the overall tone of the film.  It felt rushed and amateurish.

Blu Ray Video and Audio Quality:

Considering the film is supposed to be sourced from video I think the video quality is more than acceptable.  Overall, the print has a "soft" look to it.  Colors are subdued with an earthy, organic quality that mirrors the locale of rural Louisiana.  Contrast is excellent with well defined blacks and good shadow detail.  The DTS HD Master soundtrack is excellent with clear dialogue.  Bass extension can get very low and powerful in parts, especially the wild ending, and surrounds are active and useful.  Very good effort overall.

Conclusion:

It's not the successor to either The Exorcist or The Blair Witch Project, but The Last Exorcism is a good horror movie save the silly ending.  I really wish the director had not found it necessary to throw the movie in that direction.  YMMV, but for me it was totally over the top. 

3.5/5 stars.               

Post Twenty

On the Cult of Personality
Back in the 1980's there was a rock band called Living Colour.  This band's greatest contribution to music (besides being black, a rare thing in the hard rock world) was a song entitled "Cult of Personality".  Basically, this muse is about how all us lemmings throughout history line up behind a charismatic 'Dear Leader'.  That leader can be a pacifist like Ghandi or Martin Luther King, Jr. or a sadistic, sociopathic murderer like Josef Stalin or Adolph Hitler.  That's not really the big point, though.  The main thing the lyricist was trying to say is that humans tend to turn off our higher brain functions, and blindly follow this charismatic force to either two places; a better world or into the abyss.

The Cult of Personality is alive and well in 2011.  Many of us during the election of 2008 wanted "change".  Bush the Younger had taken this nation to an undeclared war under extremely controversial circumstances in Iraq and to a lesser extent in Afghanistan.  After seven years of continuous fighting with no end in sight even staunch conservatives started saying it was time to bring the troops home.  The economic collapse of 2008 was mere icing on the cake.  The public was aroused from it's slumber, and wanted a leader in a completely different mold from Bush.  What they got, to quote The Who, was "the new boss, same as the old boss." 

Out of seemingly nowhere, a first-term democratic Senator from Illinois by the name of Barack Obama shocked the political establishment by beating the hands-down favorite, Hillary Clinton, in the democratic primary, and following up that victory with a decisive general election win over tired, boring neo-conservative fellow Senator John McCain (R-AZ).  Now, three years into his administration, we can now see Obama for what he truly is; a bought-and-paid for mouthpiece for the powers-that-be.  Wars have not been stopped, but expanded.  Constitutional rights have not been restored, but are increasingly being eroded with obscene violations being conducted daily by the Gestapo-esque TSA and the unconstitutional Patriot Act.  The spending...oh the spending.  While Bush was no Ludwig von Mises (google him...he's worth a Wiki read) he makes Obama look like a penny-pincher. 

Obama should never have been elected President.  Not because I disagree with him on politics.  That is not enough.  He shouldn't have been elected because his main claim to fame was his charisma, not his deeds or qualifications.  Instead, Americans elected the man with the same intellectual criteria as a high school President; by his "likability"; how he looks on camera and how he gives a speech.  Cult of Personality?  You bet.

Now, it is high time we fixed that mistake.  A man is running for President that is the antithesis of every other serious candidate.  This man is not handsome.  He is not going to provoke "a thrill running up my leg" ala Chris Matthews.  Instead, he is simply an honest man who desires more than any one thing a return to our constitutional core values of small government and fiscal responsibility.  He wants our republic back.  He wants to throw the powers-at-be straight out the door just like patriots once did to a King back in 1776.  His name is Ron Paul, and if you have had enough of being treated like a child I would suggest you visit his website, and see what he is all about. 

In conclusion, it is a shame that I even need to write a blog post like this one in the 21st century.  I am reminded of Khan's line in the original Star Trek, "Everything changes, except man."  While we should intellectually know that the two political parties are really just two parts of a larger whole we still hold on to our tribal instincts rooting for one side to triumph over the other.  How's that working for you? 

The republic is not dead, but if we are so stupid as to elect another "class president", then I fear for the future.  Our debt is such that we simply cannot afford another four years of borrowing and spending at levels that will force our nation into economic ruin.  Our "nation building" is not only costly in terms of human lives and material treasure,but it goes against the core values of our republic.  Ignoring these realities has cost us too much for too long. 

You want "change"?  It's Ron Paul, not Barack Obama.  

Post Nineteen

On The Constitution and Military Action

Ask ten random people who has the power within the U.S. Constitution to declare war, and I would predict the following results.  One would say, "What Constitution?", two would say "Congress", three would say "The President", and the rest would say "Charlie Sheen".  Just kidding (sort of).  The Libyan mess has brought up the issue of who actually has the power within our society to initiate military action.  Thanks to my tutor, Judge Andrew Napolitano (whom you can see on Fox News Business every night at 8:00pm or 11:00pm), and spending a few minutes reading the Constitution I have a much better understanding of this answer. 

The Constitution addresses the concept of war in two parts; one directly the other indirectly.  For the direct language we have Article I, Section 8 which specifically says that Congress has the sole authority to declare war.  Now, I'm no genius, but I don't think the Founders wanted any deviation from this very basic edict.  Unless exigent circumstances exist (such as an invasion or some kind of surprise attack) a state of war can only exist if Congress so declares.  End of story, right?  Not so fast....

Modern thinking has vastly strengthened the power of the Presidency in this area.  The indirect route taken by these thinkers cite Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution where The President is named the Commander and Chief of the military.  In their view, this title grants the President the power of a monarch.  He can use the military where he sees fit regardless of the situation.  I have no idea where this view came from or how it is so easily justified by our leaders (enabled by our silence and "support the troops" rah-rah), but it is almost as if they simply ignore the Constitution as if it's irrelevant. 

In an effort to curb the power of the President regarding the use of military force Congress passed what is known as the War Powers Resolution in 1973.  In short, the War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of initiating military action, and such action can only last a maximum of 60 days without congressional approval (or a declaration of war).  The constitutionality of this resolution is dubious at best, even among supporters of limiting presidential power, and all Presidents basically ignore the intent of the Resolution; effectively neutering it's supposed check on military adventurism. 

After President Obama's address to the nation last night it is clear we are heading towards a constitutional crisis in regards to the use of military force against sovereign nations.  Obama basically said that where massacres of a population COULD occur the United States can intervene militarily to prevent this future tragedy.  The authority to commit the United States to such a military exercise comes from the President's own hubris, and completely removes Congress from the equation.  In the case of Libya, Obama has justified his actions because the United Nations Security Council gave him the go ahead.  Since when has the United Nations Security Council superseded our own Congress?  Finally, in an act of ultimate hypocrisy,
then-Senator Obama said on the floor of the Senate that he believed Bush the Younger's invasion of Iraq was unconstitutional.  This fact alone shows the utter contempt our leaders hold not only for the Constitution, but for us, as well.

Even though it may seem as if the Constitution is beyond saving there is hope.  Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), his father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) have banded together with Democrats like Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) to stand up to this trouncing of our beloved republic.  Whether they are successful depends on us.  Take a look at your Representative or Senator's stand on this insanity.  If they are being a good lemming and jumping off the cliff because the pied piper said so, then maybe it's time for that person to be retired. 

Our country is not a dictatorship, monarchy, or military junta.  While throwing despots like Gaddafi and Hussein into the category of Lucifer with our right hand, with our left we do business with repressive regimes like Saudi Arabia and China who are in the exact same category.  Worse, our President has assumed for himself the power of a dictator while at the same time destroying his enemy for assuming that same power for himself.  It is a wrong that cannot stand in a country that claims, "In God we Trust".   

George Washington, the first President, knew that he could not assume the powers of a King even though the whole country was ready to anoint him as such.  The genius of our form of government is that our Founding Fathers understood history; that for every Julius Caesar, there is a Nero; that for every Peter the Great, there is an Ivan the Terrible.  We cannot put our fate in the hands of one person; it is the surest way to tyranny ever devised, and the greatest con in history.

Post Eighteen

On Libya

I try not to stray into the wild and woolly world of foreign affair op-eds as these subjects are highly controversial, and could provoke unwanted chagrin from those who read this blog.  However, the media has so badly handled the Libya conflict that I thought I would dedicate a short blog to getting the facts straight.  When you study or read about a civil war one must at least have some historical perspective beyond that being provided by our traditional media sources.  Here is a brief history lesson.

The first thing you should know about Libya is that Libya is not a country in the normal sense.  After World War II, the victorious Allied powers drew a few lines on a map, and put a king in charge of the newly-drawn country.  It says something about the creation when the king, Idris-al Sanusi, wanted no part of the plan.  He was first and foremost a tribal ruler of a section of what became Libya, and had no ambition beyond that role.  This king was overthrown by a military coup lead by a junta of ambitious junior army officers in 1969, and that was when Muammar Gaddafi came to power.  Throughout the Cold War, Lybia was a pawn of the Soviet Union, and like Castro in Cuba, was given generous amounts of military equipment in order to stay in power.

During Libya's time as a Soviet client-state it embarked on foolish terrorist operations (like the Pan Am disaster over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988) which made the regime a pariah and embarrassment even to it's Soviet benefactor.  In recent years, Gaddafi has tried rebuilding his status in the world, and until recent events, has been a trusted trade partner with several Western European nations including Great Britain. 

The country of Libya is actually composed of three tribal regions: 1.  Tripolitania (western Libya which includes the largest city and the capitol, Tripoli) 2. Cyrenaica (eastern Libya which includes Benghazi and Tobruk; the two cities that are involved in the rebellion) and 3. Fezzan (southern Libya which is primarily desert and oasis).  These are tribal regions in the literal sense.  The only thing that really binds them together is their religion, Islam.  Of these two loyalties, tribe and Islam, tribe holds more sway with most people. 

Of course, the only real reason anyone cares about Libya in the first place is oil.  Europe is the prime consumer of the substance from this region, and the regional powers have been fighting over the area for a very long time.  Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the leading countries pressing for a no-fly zone are European. 

It also says something when the Arab League, an anti-democratic alliance of Arab despots, supports the European call for the destruction of the Gaddafi regime.  Common sense would indicate that when democratic western countries and dictatorial despotic regimes agree on something this significant then something stinks.  I'm not saying that Gaddafi is a good guy because he isn't.  He is a murderous despot who has no respect for human rights or the welfare of his people.  But I could say that about most of the Arab League and OPEC. 

Here is the bottom line:  Libya is not a country, and it never has been.  We have no right to dictate it's fate because the people who actually live there don't even want to be part of the country we created in the first place.  Instead, this situation should be allowed to run it's course without the intervention of Western or Arab powers whose interests lie in nothing greater than their own greed and avarice.

For centuries, outside powers have decided the fate of "countries" like Libya.  It's high-time we start letting people be truly free by deciding for themselves what is best for them.  Gaddafi's days are numbered in any case; his position has been irreparably weakened, and you can only pay a mercenary army so long before the money runs out.

I am not a fool, and I do realize that oil is essential to our economy.  But consider that Libay only represents less than 2% of the world's oil reserves.  Also consider that Libya's contributions to the U.S. oil supply is negligible.  And, finally, consider that a far more cost effective strategy would be to allow new oil drilling and refining in the U.S. rather than involving ourselves in another civil conflict.  What makes more sense?

As Galadriel in Lord of the Rings says, "The quest stands upon the edge of a knife.  Stray but a little and it will fail to the ruin of all."  Let us hope that our leaders have the prescient wisdom to see the situation for what it is, not what they want it to be.  The time for Wilsonian Democracy and Manifest Destiny is over.  We can either accept this fact, or proceed down a very dark road indeed.

Post Seventeen

On Classical Music

I love classical music.  I know, I know, that's "elevator" music to most people, or if you're feeling really cruel, "old fart" music.  While I do agree that some classical pieces are downright horrible, I could say the same for any kind of music.  What most people fail to grasp is that most of what we hear today was inspired, in no small measure, by the masters of what is known as classical music. 

Like any genre, classical music is just a broad description.  Classical music consists of genres within genres, and is not something that is very easy to define by a few simple words.  For example, the genre is defined by three "Periods" set by a period of years: Baroque (1600-1750)), Classical (1750-1830), and Romantic (1830-1910 and my favorite) are the three accepted ages of classical music.  These periods are broad; they are not meant to be hard and fast rules.  You have various overlap, and some composers defy classification.  For example, based on the time he lived Mozart was so varied in his musical composition you could put him in either Classical or Romantic; some lovers would put him in his own Period.

Each Period was defined by notable composers who stood head and shoulders above most of their contemporaries; Baroque with J.S. Bach, Classical with Beethoven and Romantic with Tchiakovsky.  Each of these composers were the veritable "rock gods" of their day.  I am not taking away anything from other composers, but I think most people have heard of at least one of these composers.  I doubt you will be seeing the same staying power out of 99% of the musicians today. 

To me, classical music is a very personal kind of music.  At it's best, this music can take hold of your heart and move it like few things can.  One of my favorite pieces is Beethoven's 9th Symphony.  Everyone knows the piece because of the famous "Ode to Joy" chorus, but the symphony itself is a miracle on paper.  Four movements (most symphonies have three) combining and forming into a work of genius and virtuosity.  Beethoven's works inspired an entire generation of German people to forge a nation that eventually rivaled that of the great superpower of the day, Great Britian.  His works are a remarkable achievment right up there with any scientific breakthrough. 

I think one of the reasons classical music gets the shaft in the modern era is that it is a music that requires focus and patience to truly appreciate.  What's more, the music is best enjoyed live which few young people seem interested in doing.  Going to the symphony, instead of an all-night rave?  No.  It's funny as some of the best classical works, like symphonies, can be quite a taxing experience.  Some run an hour long, and once you get caught up in their power it's as addictive as any drug. 

If you are fortunate enough to have a local symphony in your area you really owe yourself a favor to try it out.  Some of the greatest musical experiences of my life took place watching my local symphony perform my favorite works.  Last week, my wife and I had the thrill of seeing Beethoven's 5th Symphony peformed at a very high level; as good as most CD recordings.  For those of you who don't know, the 5th is the symphony that begins with "Da Da Da Duh".  It's so much more than that, however.  The majesty of the 2nd and 3rd movements eclipse the opening movement in every way.  The conductor, a young man from Canada, had the orchestra moving at a furious pace which is quite untraditional for this piece.  Usually, the 5th is peformed "dignified"; which, to me, equals boring.  I have only heard one other recording of the 5th that was better than this performance.  It was that good.

One the best parts of classical music is it's sheer variety.  Want large-scale, earth-shaking, full orchestral works?  Check.  Want small-scale, intimate chamber works:?  Check.  Want virtuoso solo peformances from piano to cello?  Check.  Want opera?  Check.  It's amazing how many choices one has when starting to explore this world, and that can be both good and bad.  With so many choices one can simply become overwhelmed.  Worse, the person hears one piece that they hate, and conclude they hate classical music. 

In conclusion, liking or not liking classical music is just the wrong way to look at the genre.  I don't like all kinds of classical music.  Most small-scale works put me to sleep no matter the performer or composer.  While I love solo piano I'm not a big fan of the cello.  Opera?  Most of it is not my thing save for Wagner and some Mozart.  What classical music requires above all other kinds of music is patience and commitment.  It demands participation from the listener that simply is not part of the times in this instant gratification world.  And that's sad.

Here are some of my favorite recordings.  All of them are available for purchase on Amazon.  I am also including a couple of book and movie references to help the initiate get underway without feeling overwhelmed.  Give it a chance.  You might just be surprised what you might find thereby opening yourself up to a whole new world.

Beethoven-Harnoncourt: 9 Symphonies (Box Set) 

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Harnoncourt-Symphonies-Ludwig-van-Beethoven/dp/B000000SDB/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1299072784&sr=1-2

Beethoven the way it was meant to be played.  A reviewer once described the conductor, Nikolaus Harnoncourt, as "scary".  Pretty much says it all.  If you are looking for clinical interpretation where one agonizes over getting every note perfect this is definitely not for you.  But if you are looking for passion beyond measure this is where it's at.  The best cycle in existence.  Affordable if bought used.

Rachmaninoff: Concerto No. 3 in D minor, Op. 30 / Tchaikovsky: Piano Concerto No. 1 in B flat minor, Op. 23

http://www.amazon.com/Rachmaninoff-Concerto-minor-Tchaikovsky-Piano/dp/B0000041DF/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1299073277&sr=1-1

Martha Argerich is the best classical piano player alive, and this is her signature performance.  The Rach 3 is one of the hardest, if not the hardest, concerto ever written, and Argerich is more than up to the task.  Consider this is peformed and recorded live, and one simply marvels at her super-human talent.  The Tchaikovsky concerto is also very impressive, and is simply icing on the cake.  If you love piano it doesn't get any better than this.

Bach - The Complete Brandenburg Concertos / Pearlman, Boston Baroque [Box set]

http://www.amazon.com/Bach-Complete-Brandenburg-Concertos-Pearlman/dp/B000003D1F/ref=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299073778&sr=1-4

I am not a huge fan of Baroque Period music, but of all Baroque works I like Bach's Brandenburg Concertos the best.  A complete recording of all of the concertos is the most desirable, and Telarc's recordings tend to sound very, very good.  Well worth the investment. 

Wagner - Der Ring des Nibelungen (Ring Cycle) / Sir Georg Solti [Box set]

http://www.amazon.com/Wagner-Nibelungen-Cycle-Georg-Solti/dp/B0000042H4/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299075062&sr=1-2

With opera, for me, it's either go big, or go home.  Nothing is bigger than Wagner's Ring cycle.  While old, this recording is the best complete version available.  Not cheap, but opera fans (or fans of musicals) should really enjoy this set for years to come. 

Chopin: Favorite Piano Works

http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Favorite-Piano-Works-Frederic/dp/B00000427J/ref=sr_1_11?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299075602&sr=1-11

Chopin is my favorite piano composer, and Ashkenazy is my favorite Chopin pianist.  Whiile hardly complete, this very affordable 2-CD set is a great introduction to some of the most passionate piano works of all time. 

Mozart: Requiem in D Minor, K. 626

http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Requiem-Mozarts-Original-Manuscript/dp/B00022UO9I/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299076189&sr=1-1

The work Mozart never completed due to his untimely death is one of his best.  Harnoncourt is the perfect conductor for this massive endeavor.  One the greatest masses ever written.

Orff: Carmina Burana

http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Requiem-Mozarts-Original-Manuscript/dp/B00022UO9I/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1299076189&sr=1-1

Used as a background piece in many movies involving massive amounts of testosterone this is one of those pieces you either love or hate.  The best way to describe this work is "primal".  Not for the faint of heart, but if you like big, bold music this is one of the best works out there.

Star Wars Trilogy [Box Set]

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=star+wars

Modern Classical Music!  Yes, it exists.  Movie soundtracks have taken the place of massive symphonies.  Still, John Williams' music is a worthy successor to the masters of the past.  I never get tired of Darth Vader's entrance theme. 

Copying Beethoven (DVD movie)

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dpopular&field-keywords=star+wars

Ed Harris plays a very believable Beethoven in this movie centered around Beethoven's 9th Symphony and one of his most controversial works.  It's a fictional story based on historical facts, but I enjoyed this movie more than it's competitor, Immortal Beloved, because of the strength of Harris' performance.  Well worth a couple of hours of your time. 

Amadeus (Blu-ray or DVD movie)

http://www.amazon.com/Amadeus-Blu-ray-Book-Murray-Abraham/dp/B001JNNE64/ref=sr_1_5?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1299083433&sr=1-5

The best movie about the classical music genre by a huge margin.  Hulce is spectacular as the genius Mozart and Abraham is even better as his rival, the composer Salieri.  This Academy Award winner has some of the best set design and costumes ever seen in a modern movie, and it perfectly captures the feel of the time and place.  It's long, but never feels like it.  One of my favorite films of all time.

The NPR Guide to Building a Classical CD Collection : The 350 Essential Works

http://www.amazon.com/NPR-Guide-Building-Classical-Collection/dp/0761104879/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1299083605&sr=1-1

This book is all you need to start really enjoying classical music.  It's a great guide for the beginner, and will steer you in the right direction.  Indispensable.

Post Sixteen

On War

I love military history.  It's one of my true passions that has never dulled for one second over the course of my life.  If anything, as I have grown older, this passion has grown.  I remember reading big books about World War II, you know, the ones with tons of pictures and maps that are always on clearance at Barnes and Noble, back when I was ten.  Putting yourself in the trenches in World War I, or in the Valley of Death at Gettysburg, or in the shattered ruins of Stalingrad...there is nothing quite like it.  The human trauma of war is something that should never be taken lightly, and in so many ways war is a paradox.  It is humankind's greatest and worst creation.  So many heroic and near-mythic acts are part of war.  On the other hand, some of the world's worst acts are committed for God, King, or Country.  To study military history is to study ourselves at our best and worst. 

I wanted to share with you some of the media, both book and film, that I have found indispensable in studying this fascinating subject.  Emphasis is on World War II; my favorite part of history.  Why?  Well, like many of you I had several veterans of the war in my family so there is a personal connection.  I also feel this truly was our greatest generation (props to Brokaw).  Teenagers who did nothing less than save the world from darkness; almost Tolkien in essence.  Amazing stuff.

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany by William L. Shirer

The first serious book I read about one of the greatest evils of the 20th Century.  Shirer was a correspondent for CBS who lived in Nazi Germany until 1940.  His account reads like a novel rather than dry history, and is simply a page-turner.  No one book can adequately convey the horror of the Third Reich, but no other one volume has done it so well. 

The Face of Battle
The Mask of Command
The Price of Admiralty, by John Keegan

The "holy trinity" of military history.  Keegan is Britain's most notable military historian, and his three volumes covering land warfare, naval warfare, and command are a must-read for any serious student.  The Face of Battle discusses the evolution of land warfare by analyzing various battles while The Price of Admiralty does the same thing for naval warfare.  My favorite, The Mask of Command, goes behind the mask of military leaders to discover what makes a good and bad leader during times of war. 

The Civil War: A Narrative, by Shelby Foote

Foote's three volume set is by far the most enjoyable overall history of the American Civil War ever written.  Foote is a good ol' boy from Mississippi, and his antebellum southern charm comes through in his addictive writing.  In particular, the section discussing the Battle of Gettysburg, "Stars in Their Courses", is both vivid and emotional in impact and historical accuracy. 

When Titans Clashed; How the Red Army Stopped Hitler, by David M. Glantz

Glantz is the best historian covering the Soviet Union before and during World War II.  The war between Nazi Germany and Soviet Union was the single largest military struggle of all time, and this book nails the reasons for the Nazi's failure and Soviet's success.  Strips away tons of myths and assumptions about supposed German superiority and invincibility.  A serious work, but still very readable.

The Forgotten Soldier, by Guy Sajer

First person accounts are a dime a dozen, but no other book has captured the heat of battle quite as well as this one.  Whether liberties with the truth were taken or not (quite a controversy exists as to whether or not Sajer served with the unit described) one cannot deny the emotional impact of this book.  You can smell the battlefield as Sajer recounts the exploits of a famous German division fighting the Red Army on the Eastern Front in World War II.  Told from the frontline soldier's point of view with no political motivation.

Meditations, by Emperor Marcus Aurelius 

A philosophy book written by a Roman Emperor?  You bet.  The Stoic philosophy defined every aspect of Roman society; especially in the training of their famous legions.  The Roman legion dominated warfare for hundreds of years, and the rock-solid discipline hammered into their soldiers had a great deal to do with that success.  Aurelius's masterpiece of philosophy is a good way to put yourself in their shoes.

Band of Brothers (book and miniseries)
Citizen Soldiers, by Stephen Ambrose

Ambrose is a great historian, even if some of his books were not as good as his World War II stuff.  These two examples are some of the best books on the American experience in World War II in Europe.  Band of Brothers was used as the basis for the HBO mini-series of the same name.  It tells the story of a company of paratroopers from their early training until the end of the war.  Citizen Soldiers is a more generic depiction of the U.S. Army's experience in Europe.  Like Foote's Civil War books Ambrose combines solid history and readability which is rare thing in the genre.

Guadalcanal: The Definitive Account of the Landmark Battle, by Richard Frank

Guadalcanal was the greatest battle of the Pacific War in World War II.  Both on sea and land the armies and navies of the Empire of Japan and the United States did battle to the death for dominance over an insignificant piece of real estate.  Places like Henderson Field, Savo Island, Ironbottom Sound, and Edson's Ridge became legendary in military history.  Victory by the United States ensured victory over Japan, though it took three more grueling years of no-quarter battle to achieve this forgone conclusion.  This book covers all aspects of the battle better than any other single history.

The First World War, by John Keegan

This general history of World War I is Keegan at his best.  I read the whole thing in one sitting.  World War I is the saddest excuse for a war humanity ever came up with, and the millions who died in terrible trench warfare could attest to the futility of it all.  The narrative can sometimes be dry as a martini in places, but the essence of the war and it's insanity come through loud and clear. 

Saving Private Ryan, Directed by Steven Spielberg

One has never seen battle on film until one has seen the first twenty minutes of "Saving Private Ryan".  Ambrose's book, D-Day: June 6th, 1944: The Climatic Battle of World War II, was used as the main source for this movie.  While it takes huge historical leaps and liberties the authentic flavor of battle is what this movie is all about.  No one interested in the subject should miss this film.

Triumph of the Will, Directed by Leni Riefenstahl

Hitler's masterwork of propaganda.  Depicts the Nazi Party's Nuremberg rally in 1934.  Watch it because it will show you, beyond any shadow of doubt, why millions of German's set aside their humanity to follow a demon into hell.  Note: Not an endorsement of the message.

Paths of Glory, Directed by Stanley Kubrick

I love this World War I antiwar film even more than the better known "All Quiet on the Western Front".  The horror of World War I is summed up perfectly in this film which stars Kirk Douglas in an unforgettable performance of a man fighting against his own army.  One of the greatest closing arguments ever shot on screen should make mandatory viewing for trial lawyers. 

Patton, Directed by Franklin J. Schaffner

General George S. Patton was America's greatest field general of World War II.  A perfect study of the man, myth, and legend.  As much a study in personality as a war movie.  Patton exemplifies the best and worst of us, just like war itself.  George C. Scott gave a performance of a lifetime, and the best opening scene of any movie in history (IMO).

Tora!, Tora!, Tora!, Directed by Richard Fleischer and Kinji Fukasaku

A boring telling of the Pearl Harbor attack unless you're a history buff, but no doubt the most accurate Pacific theatre movie made up until "The Pacific" mini-series.  Interesting note:  The American and Japanese portions of the film were shot separately allowing directors to show both perspectives so it's almost two movies in one.  It's a history lesson, but a good one.

We Were Soldiers, Directed by Randall Wallace

An amazing film based on the book by the unit's commanding officer.  The best Vietnam movie, IMO.  A great study in command and courage.  Some may find it a bit over the top with the "Ra, Ra, Ra," nature of the story.  I think that's forgivable considering the tone of films like "Platoon" and "Apocalypse Now".

Gettysburg, Directed by Ronald F. Maxwell

A mostly accurate re-telling of the great American Civil War battle.  Based on the historical novel, The Killer Angels, by Michael Shaara.  A battle as massive as Gettysburg is very hard to portray in a film, but this one does it skillfully by focusing on the key players, and sticking to the bigger pieces of the battle.  Interesting Note: Ted Turner plays an extra, and takes a bullet during Pickett's Charge, the film's climatic scene.  He paid for the film, so I guess he was entitled.

The Grey Zone, Directed by Tim Blake Nelson

"Schindler's List" is the obvious choice for a Holocaust film, but I prefer my martini straight up.  "The Grey Zone" is uncomfortable to watch from beginning to end, but should be required viewing for all students.  It's movies like this that remind us all how fragile our humanity and freedom are, and how quickly they can be snuffed out in a blink of an eye. 

Glory, Directed by Edward Zwick

My favorite war movie of all time.  Beautiful cinematography and music.  Performances from Matthew Broderick, Denzel Washington, and Morgan Freeman are Oscar worthy.  The history is solid, and told with so much emotional impact you will not be dry-eyed by the end.  Some movies are about the American Civil War; this was the war.  Incredible.

Post Fifteen

Hard Times: Part Nine

For my final post about my prison experience I would like to share some of my opinions and observations based on my own personal experiences combined with my professional education and research. 

"Criminal Justice" is an oxymoron.  Like the military, the justice system likes the use of such phrases to make things that are incredibly dangerous and violent sound innocuous.  During the Cold War our military and political leaders loved to name our nuclear weapons things like "Peacekeeper".  Even the War Department's name was changed to Department of Defense to better reflect a non-aggressive stance.  Something soft and yummy like Momma's apple pie.  Like this example from the military, the American criminal justice system is loaded with contradiction and hyperbole designed to make us all think we are doing something wholesome and pure.  And while I would say that the goals of both the American military and justice system are noble on the highest levels the tactics that are used in our name have strayed so far from a pure intent as to jeopardize the whole system.

A Call for the Decriminalization of Drugs

Prohibition was probably the single best example in American history of a policy with good intentions creating something that was ultimately disastrous on so many levels as to be laughable.  The sheer arrogance that drugs are any different from alcohol is really becoming an untenable argument on so many levels.  Almost every month we are seeing law enforcement busting down doors, terrorizing families, and even shooting the family's dog all in the name of seizing a couple of joints.  These actions are not only unconstitutional but brutal in their approach.  Thomas Jefferson would be rolling over in his grave.

In the end, there are two organizations who benefit from illegal drugs.  The first group would be the drug cartel and street level dealers who make billions of dollars off of tax-free, illegal drugs.  The violence that results from rivals killing each other is getting to the point of where a real war is actually being fought and lost by law enforcement; the Mexican drug war on our southern border has killed over 30,000 people in the last few years.  Our inner cities are rife with violence and hopelessness as the only way out for most of these kids are gangs and the drug money that goes with being in one. 

The second group who benefits is law enforcement.  The amount of money spent fighting drugs is enormous and totally out of proportion to the success they provide.  The DEA has become the modern version of the Treasury Department during prohibition.  While individual agents are risking their lives going undercover in the drug world the billions of taxpayer dollars that flow into the bureaucracy is itself criminal in it's waste.  However, each year we pour more funds on a local, county, state, and federal level expecting a different result.  Short of throwing the Constitution out the window and the creation of a police state we will never, ever be able to "win" this war.  I would much rather be free than to see the means necessary to eliminate drug use from the street level (the elimination of the right against unlawful search and seizure and warrantless arrests are two things that would be necessary, at the very least).

Finally, I can tell you from personal experience that putting drug users and dealers in prison is a doomed method to cure the drug scourge.  I can't tell you how many "1 Year and 1 Day" prison sentences I seen handed down by judges for a violation of probation due to using or selling illegal drugs.  These felons are put into the system with some of the most violent people on earth.  What comes out after a few months with these wonderful blokes as your cellmate is not a rehabilitate drug user, but more often than not a violent, hardened criminal.  He or she will most likely be back in and out of the justice system for the rest of their lives.  From a cost standpoint it is very expensive to house these felons in state and federal prisons.  Compared to county jails the cost of housing these prisoners at the state and federal level is much higher, and to what end?  It just blows my mind.

Our country is broke.  A major source of revenue would be the legalization of drugs and the high taxes that could be placed on their sale.  If only some of this money generated would go towards rehabilitation and prevention you would see a much more positive result than throwing these people in prison.  Drug use, in my opinion, would go down instead of up.   

Should we legalize all drugs tomorrow?  No.  We should start with marijuana as a trial balloon.  If libertarians like me are wrong, then by all means, go back and make it's use and sale illegal again.  We can't continue on our current course, in any event.  Even if you disagree with me you would have to admit that the War on Drugs in it's present form is a war we lost a long time ago.  It's time to try something radically different.  Let's come up with a capitalist solution to the problem, and put these drug dealers out of business tomorrow.

Prison is for Violent People

Non-violent crime, the two most common examples being theft and drug use, should never be punished with prison sentences.  You must understand that prison is an incredibly violent place.  If your intent is to rehabilitate the criminal you will be sadly disappointed.  I had many inmates who were on their 5th, 6th, and 7th prison stretches.  Rehabilitation is one of those things that liberals in classrooms talk about in theory, but never once have these pinhead professors spent one day working inside a hardcore prison.  Their theory is so wrong it makes my head hurt.

My solution would be to house only violent offenders in prisons.  If you murder, rape, or molest you belong in prison for the rest of your life.  If you commit armed robberies as your career of choice you belong in prison for a very long time.  If you love to beat people up for fun, you need to go to be housed with others who feel the same way.  Too often, our prison system takes a non-violent person and makes the person into a hardcore, violent criminal on their eventual release.  The reason for this is primarily borne out of necessity.  Like a cynical Sergeant once told me, "You either fight, or f#$%."  While crass, this statement is very true.  Prison for inmates is very much Lord of the Flies; might makes right, the weak perish, and the sheep are slaughtered.  What do you think would happen under those conditions?  Violence in prison is not merely a symptom, but a way of life.  A state of existence.  A reality.

Sex Offenders Should Go To Hell

So much for my objectivity.  While I am very open minded about drugs, I am the polar opposite when it comes to sex offenders.  There is not a single worse person on the planet than a child molester.  I have known hundreds, and consider this chilling fact.  For every one of those creatures I had the misfortune of knowing personally they were responsible for molesting, on average at least one hundred victims.  Victims whose innocence was taken from them in the worst possible way.  I am not God, and I am generally a pretty non-violent guy for the most part.  But I have no use for this filth.  Life in prison is the only legitimate sentence.  They should never see the light of day again.  There are exceptions, such as statutory rape.  Why our system of justice doesn't distinguish between these "criminals" and a child molester is another problem.  Believe me, there is a huge difference.

In Florida, we have a facility for sex offenders called the Jimmy Ryce Unit.  It is not under the auspices of the Department of Corrections, but the Division of Children and Families.  Basically, a battery of mental health professionals evaluate a sex offender before his release.  If they deem him irredeemable, then the inmate is sent to this facility under an involuntary, indefinite, civil commitment.  I think this is basically a good idea, but flawed in it's execution.  Why not just make certain types of sex crimes life sentences?  No need for an expensive, separate facility that has absolutely no business being outside the FDOC's supervision.

The Death Penalty is Broken

This is a tough issue for me.  For many years, I was as pro-death penalty as one could get.  However, I have had a change of heart.  For me, it's a question of morals.  I am pro-life.  I do not believe in the early termination of a pregnancy as a form of birth control.  It's wrong, and I would never support it.  How, then, can I play God and say it's within my rights to take your life?  Evil for evil is a losing proposition.  And if you think I am some lefty fruitcake from the 60's consider this:  a lifetime in prison is no vacation in paradise.  In truth, I would much rather be taken out and shot in the back of the head then spend the rest of my life behind bars.  It's that bad, people.

If we were to look at the death penalty objectively there are two major arguments for it.  One I can reject on an intellectual level, and the other on a moral level.  The first argument is that the death penalty deters crime.  It doesn't, folks.  I never once had a person who had been on death row tell me that because he would be executed that was reason enough for him not to do the crime.  Murder is something that is in the heart, and premeditated murder is something that comes from the soul; a very dark and black one.  Once you have committed yourself to such a path nothing will deter you.  Certainly not years waiting to be executed.

The second argument is that the death penalty is justice served.  What people are really saying is that it's a legal lynching.  It's the most honest argument for the death penalty, and one that I can relate to on a personal level.  If my family had been brutally murdered by someone I can't say for one second that I wouldn't love to see the perp drawn and quartered.  Is it right, though, and does it jive with a moral philosophy of behavior?  No.  So we must surrender to the better angels of our nature, love the sinner, and make sure he is as uncomfortable as possible serving a hellish time behind walls for the rest of his life.

Conclusion

I realize these are hot-button issues, and I am well aware of the counter arguments.  I respect them.  These opinions are expressed from the heart, but also derived from actual experience.  I wouldn't tell an NFL quarterback how to throw a ball into coverage without first being able to relate on a practical level.  Working in the justice system for almost a decade, along with 5 years of schooling, does give the basis for an informed opinion beyond the norm.

Does that mean I am always right? Heck, no.  Your morality may not be mine, and I admit that I could be wrong.  To err is human.  I would hope, though, you would consider these arguments with an open mind.  At the very least, I hope these words provided a spark of thought in the grey matter.  In the end, that's all a writer can ask for.

I hope you have enjoyed this nine part series of "Hard Times".  Till next time... 

Post Fourteen

Hard Times: Part Eight

This post was going to be the last concerning my experience working in the Florida prison system.  That was the plan last week.  Then I started thinking about a great many stories that you might find interesting.  However, due to time constraints, I thought I would put these stories in a "Best/Worst Of" format.  Hope you enjoy.

Worst Inmate

A tough one.  So many candidates.  However, there is one that really deserves this award above all others.  This inmate came to prison in the 70's convicted of murder and rape.  While in prison, he followed up this achievement by taking a female civilian hostage and raping her repeatedly.  He fancies himself a disciple of Charles Manson, and put a tattoo of a swastika in between his eyes.  He wrote and spoke the most horrifying threats imaginable; sent chills up the spine.  He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, but I felt that was an inappropriate diagnosis; he is just plain evil.  He is a writer of extremely convoluted and complicated grievances and lawsuits.  He threatened to kill me for lying in front of a judge against him during one of these suits.  An extremely unpopular inmate among other inmates, but he was in solitary confinement during nearly all the time I had him so no one actually tried to kill him.  No doubt the worst prisoner I ever had the displeasure of dealing with on a daily basis.

Worst Crime

Again, many candidates.  However, this one is not for the faint of heart so stop reading if graphic violence bothers you.  We received this inmate while we were still a general population facility.  He was married and his wife became pregnant.  As the baby started to show the man went berserk; he claimed the child was not his and she had an affair.  He proceeded to stab his wife many times about the body.  Once she was subdued he cut the baby from her stomach.  He put the baby's remains in a suitcase, and mailed the suitcase to her mother.  Somehow, he only received a life sentence.  I think the D.A. felt that the crime was so bizarre that he might have had a mental handicap mitigation defense.  He tried to escape from Charlotte, and spent years on Close Management.  Ugly stuff. 

Worst Start in Life

There is a debate on whether evil is born or learned.  The answer is really both, but I think sometimes a person can be a bad seed right from the start with little blame to themselves.  Such was the case of this inmate.  His mother was a crack whore in Miami.  His Dad raped her, and then Mom murdered Dad.  His mother is serving life for that killing.  So, this inmate was the product of rape and murder.  He proceeded to follow in Mom and Dad's footsteps by raping and murdering his way into prison.  Serving a life sentence for multiple counts of both crimes.  You could feel the evil coming off of this one; truly a dark cloud hovered over him.  A permanent resident of the Mental Health Unit due to non-manageable sociopath behavior. 

Best Correctional Officer

No doubt this was my Close Management Dorm Lieutenant.  The man was a rock and tough as nails.  He never tried to be a friend to inmates or staff; you did your job, or you went to hell.  I liked that.  You always knew where you stood, and we really ran a great dorm together.  Had my back through the thick and thin, and I let him do his job with minimal interference.  A brother-in-arms that I truly miss.

Best Correctional Employee

My Supervisor who is now an Assistant Warden of Programs.  I wouldn't have made it in correctional work without him.  I really owe any success I ever had to him.  A father-figure who treated me like a son. 

The Only Inmate I Ever Felt Sorry For

If you have ever had a little (or lot) to drink and got behind a wheel of car you will understand this story more than most.  He was a guy you could have met on the street, and I could have easily have been him.  He was sick, and talk a high-powered, codeine-based cold medicine.  He drove his family to some kind of function, and then went the bar.  He had a couple of beers (he was barely over the limit), and picked up his family.  On the drive home he was involved in a car wreck that killed his wife and daughter.  Of course, he survived.  His wife's family pressed for the maximum sentence, and he is serving 15 years in prison.  I'm not saying he was innocent because he wasn't.  But for the grace of God go I....

The Most Beautiful Music Performance I Ever Saw

Forgive me for not being politically correct, but blacks really have a set of pipes.  Prison has a way of bringing out extreme emotion, and a bunch of black convicts who have a lot of emotion to get out really can put on a show.  The Chaplain put on a gospel sing/breakfast for the staff one day.  It was incredible.  I have never heard such passion and pain expressed through the voice.  Amazing in every way, and that music will stay with me for the rest of my life.

The Scariest Place in the State of Florida

There are scary places, and then there are really scary places.  I have stood on the battlefield of Gettysburg and felt chills run through me; the place was alive.  However, it pales in comparison to the death chamber at Florida State Prison in Starke.  Hundreds of people have been either electrocuted by Ol' Sparky (the name of the electric chair) or by lethal injection.  Such luminaries as Ted Bundy have taken the green mile to it's walls and met their maker.  It's a chilling place, and one that I hope I never see again.

The Funniest Inmate I Ever Met

This inmate was a bug, meaning he was crazy but with NOS as a diagnosis-Not Otherwise Specified.  The man was just plain nuts.  His favorite thing to do was to pick up discarded cigarette butts and eat them.  One day, he found an officer's golf cart with the keys in the starter.  The officers spent the better part of half a day tracking him down.

So, that's it for the stories.  I will get to my opinions (and the final post) in the next week or two.

Post Thirteen

Hard Times: Part Seven

After the murder of Officer Lathrem things changed very quickly at Charlotte C.I.  Security had a new Warden, Colonel, and Major.  The number of new security staff who were transferred from North Florida brought a new, hard attitude towards how things were done.  Charlotte was no longer a general population prison.  Instead, it was now part of a handful of prisons in the United States that were classified as "Supermax"; prisons within prisons.  Supermax prisons housed the inmates regular prisons couldn't or wouldn't.  Some famous supermax prisons you may have heard of are Pelican Bay (California) and Colorado State Prison.  Rehabilitation takes a backseat to incarceration and security.  Discipline is applied without regards to civilian sensibilities.  This prison was no longer a fun place to work; it was a serious battleground where the strong survived, and the weak quit. 

As the Close Management Classification Officer before Charlotte went Supermax my Supervisor and Assistant Warden relied on me to implement Classification's compliance with the Osterback lawsuit (see previous post).  This compliance required a great deal of contact and coordination with the other Departments (Security, Mental Health, Medical, and Education).  Something called the Multi-Disciplinary Services Team (MDST) was formed.  The MDST was the lynchpin of the Osterback decision.  In short, the MDST coordinated the efforts of all departments within a single dorm.  For example, I was assigned to G-Dorm.  For G-Dorm, the MDST consisted of me, a Mental Health counselor, a teacher, a nurse, and a Lieutenant.  Theoretically, we were all equal, but in practice Security, Classification, and Mental Health were the most active and had the most power (in that order).  I must say that the MDST, while a pain in some areas (worthless paperwork that needed to be filled out, for one) was basically a good thing.  It brought together all departments for the first time in history, and allowed for teamwork that never would have existed otherwise.

Within a couple of months after the murder we started receiving our new Close Management inmates en masse.  A large amount of these inmates were received from Florida State Prison (FSP).  FSP is one of state's oldest prisons, and had been our only Supermax prison in Florida befor the Osterback lawsuit.  Now, FSP was transferring some of it's worst inmates to both Charlotte and Santa Rosa C.I.  I can't say I was truly prepared for what came off of those buses.  These inmates were unlike anything I had worked with before; they were as hard as marble and most of their jackets (files) had to be stored in multiple boxes.  A great many had killed before, both in and out of prison, and none had made much of an effort to assimilate to general population.  What struck me the most was their silence; at least at first.

At FSP you are not allowed to talk without permission.  This rule was an FSP rule, and Charlotte had never applied such a strict standard.  How FSP managed to do this one cannot say, but I am sure it involved methods that were not entirely legal.  Most of their inmates didn't say a word for a couple of weeks.  I thought, "Wow, this is a great!".  It didn't last.  Once they realized that their would not be any "discipline" for speaking they started yelling and screaming at anything and anyone.  It was as if a bear had awakened from it's hibernation.  The fact that the metal plates covering the windows had been taken down meant that anyone was a potential target.  This problem had to be solved, and Security fought back.

Sabre Red is a type of pepper spray/tear gas that is incredibly powerful.  It was not something one could go buy out of a self-defense catalog.  The spray consisted of a 5% burning agent which would coat the lungs.  In short, every time you took a breath you felt as thought your insides were literally on fire.  I once caught a wiff of this stuff from a good 50 feet away, and nearly gagged.  Security responded to disobedience with this new weapon.  A normal use of force involved an inmate refusing to be cuffed.  After going through the motions the inmate's cell would be flooded with Sabre Red through the cell's food flap.  The result was immediate compliance. 

In the worst situations, such as inmate's flooding their cells and covering their windows, Security would send in an extraction team.  You have probably seen videos of this process on television.  I never really witnessed one myself as Security cleared the dorm of all civilians.  However, I have seen the end result, and the inmate always looked as though they had been through hell.  Here is one story a Lieutenant told me:

An inmate was refusing to pull his towel out of the window or comply with any verbal commands.  The Lieutenant brought down the extraction team and video camera (all premeditated uses of force are video taped).  Assembling all this manpower takes time and is a very much a hassle. 

The inmate thought he would get over on Security by taking down his towel and proudly saying, "I'll come out now", with a big smile on his face. 

The Lieutenant was not impressed.  He said, "You made your bed, now sleep in it.   Roll the tape!"  The inmate looked quite shocked as the extraction team burst into his cell, and the inmate received the full force of an electric shock shield.  Did the Lieutenant follow procedure?  By the letter of the law, of course not.  But it worked, and that inmate wouldn't pull a stunt like that again for a long time. 

As I said, G-Dorm was my new home.  My Lieutenant was a former Army Sergeant that had a tough reputation.  He was from Chicago and was as hard on his officers as the inmates.  He was not entirely popular but he was fair.  If you did what he said you didn't have any problems.  If you broke the rules, you did.  It was that simple.  His view of order was on the same wavelength as my own.  Early on in our three years together we set the precedence of our cooperation in stone.  I was conducting my weekly tour when one of my inmates started yelling to me after I left his cell door; a big no-no.  I attempted to counsel the inmate, but he would have none of it.  For a couple of minutes I let him get it out of his system, but finally I had had enough.  I told him, "Get off the door". 

In Close Management you are not allowed to be on the door unless there is a reason.  Once I had given the inmate a direct verbal order to get off his door that was an ultimatum.  If he refused, bad things could happen.  He knew it, and I knew it.  After two more orders to get off the door I could see this was going no where.  By then, my Lieutenant had shown up, and he said, "What's the matter?". 

I said, "The inmate won't get off his door." 

The Lieutenant coldly looked at the inmate, and said, "Get off the door".  The inmate made some kind of vile remark.  The Lieutenant calmly told me, "We'll take care of this, but you had better go back to Classification.".  I did.

The next time I went through the dorm the inmate apologized to me in extreme terms.  He said that he would never disrespect me again, and that he was sorry. 

I said to him, "What happened to your face?".  He said, "Oh, I slipped and fell on the toilet.". 

"Oh...well, I'm glad that's over." 

Not looking me in the eye he said, "Me, too, Mr. Z."  

Sounds awful, doesn't it?  Well, if you haven't been there and done it, believe me, you can't judge.  This one example is nothing really; it's an everyday, or at least every week occurrence in lock down prisons.  We were charged with housing the worst criminals in the country.  Imagine doing that with nothing more than harsh language.  It's impossible. 

In addition to G-Dorm, I also was assigned to Y-Dorm.  Y-Dorm wasn't really a dorm.  It was shaped like an X with only two wings and one floor (fun fact; the higher-ups in Tallahassee made us change the dorm's name from "X" to "Y" as "X" gave off a bad connotation...and we pay these people?).  We housed the worst of Charlotte's inmates there; inmates who would gladly ride shotgun for Satan himself.  I remember one of our first tenants.  He was transferred from FSP in the middle of the night for badly assaulting two of their officers.  In order to save his life (not kidding) they moved him to us (in the old days, the guy wouldn't have stood a chance).  It took ten officers to get him into the cell, from what I was told.  When I went in to the wing the next morning this inmate had literally ripped the bunk from a concrete wall.  The bunk had been welded into the wall.  Feces were everywhere, and it appeared that was what his dinner had consisted of.  I can still remember the smell.  I have never smelled dead bodies, but I don't think it could be much worse. 

For the most part, the three years after the murder were my best in the prison.  I loved working with my staff, and things ran very smoothly (at least as much as possible).  I never had a suicide or murder in my dorm; never even a serious assault.  We ran a tight ship, and the inmates respected that.  Like, no, but respected; huge difference.  You never want an inmate to like his situation or you; it's prison, after all.

Next post I will close out my prison story with my opinions on corrections in general.